HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH.

                      ***

CWP No. 18971 of 2008.

*** Madan Singh Versus State of Haryana and others.

*** Present: Shri Puneet Bali, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Shri H.S.Hooda, Advocate General, with Shri Rameshwar Malik, Addl: A.G.Haryana.

*** T.S.Thakur, Chief Justice (Oral) This petition pose a question of validity of an order passed by the Chairman, Haryana Pollution Control Board dated October 17, 2008 issued under Section 31-A of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, directing closure of all mining operations carried out by the petitioner for mining of minor mineral quarry in Villages Ramgarh / Sherifpur and Village Chandpura in district Ambala. When this petition came up before us on November 17, 2008, it was inter alia pointed out by Mr. Bali, counsel appearing for the petitioner that the government had not properly notified the constitution of the Board and the Members comprising the same, as required under Sections 5 and 7 of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, nor had the government appointed appellant authority as required under Section 31-A of the Act. The validity of the impugned order passed by the Chairman of the Board was on that ground assailed by the petitioner.

Learned Advocate General, appearing for the State of Haryana and the Pollution Control Board had however sought time to sort out the matter and to take steps for notification of the Board as also the constitution of an appellate authority in terms of Section 31 of the Act aforementioned.

Mr. Hooda has today filed before us copies of two notifications,

-2- CWP No. 18971 of 2008.

one dated 21.11.2008 issued under Section 4(2) and 5(1) of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 nominating the Chairman and the Members of the Haryana State Pollution Control Board. By the 2nd notification dated November 26, 2008, the government have constitution an appellate authority comprising Justice A.S.Garg, a former Judge of this Court, as President with two other members. It is submitted by Mr. Hooda that with the issue of the above notifications deficiency if any in the constitution of the Board and the appellate authority in terms of the Act stands removed. He further points out that the State Pollution Control Board has already entertained an application filed by the petitioner for the issue of "Consent to Establish" (Post Facto) the unit for mining of minerals in the villages mentioned above and issued the requisite consent in terms of Section 21(1) of the Act. A copy of the said Consent order has also been placed on record by Mr. Hooda. He argues that with the issues of consent, the petitioner can if so advised seek "Consent to Operation" the said unit after complying with all other requirements stipulated for the same.

Mr. Bali, counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that with the issue of "Consent to Establish" in favour of the petitioner, the petitioner in now free to apply for issue of a consent to operate the unit upon compliance with the conditions stipulated for the same. He submits that this petition could be disposed of with a direction that the Board shall entertain the application for issue of "Consent to Operate" and pass appropriate orders on the same, in accordance with law, expeditiously.

In the circumstances therefore, and keeping in view the submissions made at the Bar, we are inclined to dispose of this writ petition reserving liberty to the petitioner to seek "Consent to Operate" the unit mentioned earlier in accordance with the Act and the Rules on the subject. We further direct that in case an application for grant of "consent to operate" is filed by the petitioner, within two weeks from today, the

-3- CWP No. 18971 of 2008.

competent authority shall consider the said request and pass appropriate orders on the same in accordance with law expeditiously. We make it clear that in case the petitioner is aggrieved of the order which the State Pollution Control Board would pass, he shall be free to seek appropriate redress before the appellate authority constituted by the State in terms of Section 31(1) and (2) of the Act 1981. No costs.

(T.S.Thakur) Chief Justice (Jasbir Singh) Judge November 27, 2008 Malik